Claims solicitor appeal against being struck off turned down

A solicitor who failed to disclose his interest in an intermediary which obtained evidence for claims handled by solicitors on the panel of a personal injury claims management company has had his appeal against being struck off turned down.

Anthony Dennison, who sold his shares in Legal Reports Services Ltd the year after the Accident Group collapsed, was fined £20,000, despite his being found to have acted dishonestly, by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in November 2009 – a decision which was later appealed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

The Divisional Court agreed with the SRA and ordered Dennison to be struck off but he appealed the decision at the Court of Appeal.

Dennison had an interest in Legal Reports Services, which acted as an intermediary for obtaining expert evidence for claims handled by solicitors on the panel of the now defunct Accident Group,

The Accident Group collapsed in 2003 and Dennison sold his shares in February 2004, but he did not disclose his interest in LRS until July 2007.

It was alleged at the SDT that this behaviour created a conflict between his financial interests and his and his firm’s duty to clients.

The Tribunal found he deliberately kept his interest in the company secret, he failed to inform clients of his interest in the company providing their medical reports, and he deliberately deceived his partners because he wanted to retain the whole benefit of the interest for himself.

One argument put forward at the Court of Appeal on behalf of Dennison was that the SDT could impose a substantial fine rather than strike him off. The court rejected this argument because it was based on an assumption that the dishonesty was not serious, despite the Tribunal describing his behaviour as “very serious”.

The Court of Appeal decided that a large fine, even with a period of suspension, was not an appropriate penalty.

The SRA welcomed the Court of Appeal judgment that confirms proven dishonesty by a solicitor almost invariably results in them being struck off.

SRA executive director David Middleton said: “It was important to bring the appeal against the SDT’s decision in this case to maintain the principle that a finding of dishonesty will almost invariably indicate that a solicitor is a risk to the public and therefore that strike off is the appropriate order to be made. “We do not believe that substantial fining powers are a substitute for strike off when the risk to the public is substantial.”